Rules for the virtual playground
You know the internet has finally come of age when its veterans start calling for a “Blogging Code of Conduct”. Tim O'Reilly, who first came up with the phrase “web 2.0” has caused a firestorm in the virtual world by daring to suggest that bloggers should curtail their online behaviour.
His proposal came about after one of his good friends, programming instructor and game developer Kathy Sierra started receiving death threats on her blog which were then followed up by images of, among other things, a noose held up next to her head, along with sexually derogatory comments, on several sites which have since been shut down. On her own blog, she also received posts from anonymous commenters who gave out her social security number and home address. This led her to cancel her speaking engagement at a San Diego conference and temporarily shut down her blog.
While the majority of the blogosphere would in no way condone what happened to Sierra, many are up in arms about O'Reilly's code. Some have labelled it ridiculous. Some are calling it an infringement of free speech. One commenter wrote, “So-called ‘community standards’ are merely the latest example of the agents of normalcy and entrenchment subconsciously attempting to organize, dictate, tame and pacify”.
But looking at O'Reilly's first draft, many of his points are principles that should govern all polite social behaviour—for example, “We won't say anything online that we wouldn't say in person”, or “We connect privately before we respond publicly” (which sounds just like Matthew 18:15-20). These things ought to be obvious (though perhaps they need to be re-emphasized, given the poor example of individuals on reality TV shows like Big Brother, or celebrities like Naomi Campbell who didn't think twice about hitting her assistant with a mobile phone). Indeed, rather than being rules which “organize, dictate, tame and pacify”, the code is simply a practical expression of how to love thy virtual neighbour.
However, in the midst of the debate about how the code should be implemented, whether or not it can be enforced and what symbol the badges should use (yes, there are badges), there was one idea that was curiously missing: the real motivation behind the love your neighbour principle. We don't do it because it's the right thing to do (even though it is). We don't do it because we love others and we desire their good (even though we do). We do it because our neighbours, virtual or otherwise, have been created in the image of God. The Book of James points out that with our tongues we “bless our Lord and Father, and with it we curse people who are made in the likeness of God” (Jas 3:9). Slander, death threats, misogynistic behaviour and trolling are all wrong because, in transgressing against another human being, they ultimately transgress against the person of God himself.
Though we may not be able to see God's image reflected in a user's avatar, screen name or buddy icon, we still have a responsibility to relate to them in love. Given the ubiquitous nature of trolls, flame wars and pie fights, the people of God created in the image of God have a real opportunity here to let their light shine just as brightly in the blogosphere as anywhere else in the real world (Matt 5:16).